[Comparison of efficacy and safety between domestic immune checkpoint inhibitors and pembrolizumab in the treatment of driver gene-negative advanced non-small cell lung cancer].

ABSTRACT

Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of domestic immune checkpoint inhibitors and pembrolizumab in the treatment of driver gene-negative advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on the data of 1 241 patients with driver gene-negative, unresectable stage ⅢB to Ⅳ non-small cell lung cancer who were treated at the Hunan Cancer Hospital from January 1, 2017 to October 1, 2022. All patients received monotherapy or combination therapy with domestic immune checkpoint inhibitors or pembrolizumab. Among the 1 241 patients, there were 1 066 males and 175 females, with an age range of 14 to 84 years and a median age of 62 years. Among them, 67 patients received monotherapy with domestic immune checkpoint inhibitors, 695 patients received combination therapy with domestic immune checkpoint inhibitors, 102 patients received monotherapy with pembrolizumab, and 377 patients received combination therapy with pembrolizumab. The efficacy and safety of domestic immune checkpoint inhibitors and pembrolizumab monotherapy or combination therapy were compared. Results: In the immune checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy group, the objective response rate (ORR) using domestic immune checkpoint inhibitors and pembrolizumab was 43.3%(29/67) and 44.1%(45/102), respectively, and the disease control rate (DCR) was 79.1%(53/67) and 84.3%(86/102), respectively, with no statistically significant differences (both P>0.05). In the immune combination therapy group, the ORR using domestic immune checkpoint inhibitors and pembrolizumab was 60.9%(423/695) and 62.9%(237/377), respectively, and the DCR was 92.9%(646/695) and 91.0%(343/377), respectively, with no statistically significant differences (both P>0.05). In the immune checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy group, the median progression-free survival (PFS) using domestic immune checkpoint inhibitors and pembrolizumab was 9.0 (95%CI 3.0-15.0) months and 7.4 (95%CI 4.8-9.8) months, respectively, with no statistically significant differences (P=0.660). The median overall survival (OS) was 27.0 (95%CI 25.0-29.0) months and 22.0 (95%CI 17.1-26.9) months, respectively, with no statistically significant differences (P=0.673). In the immune combination therapy group, the median PFS using domestic immune checkpoint inhibitors and pembrolizumab was 9.0 (95%CI 8.2-9.8) months and 10.5 (95%CI 9.0-12.0) months, respectively, with no statistically significant differences (P=0.186). The median OS was 24.0 (95%CI 19.1-28.9) months and 26.0 (95%CI 21.3-30.7) months, respectively, with no statistically significant differences (P=0.359). The incidence of grade 1-2 reactive capillary proliferation of the skin in the domestic immune checkpoint inhibitor group and pembrolizumab group was 14.0% (107/762) and 0, respectively. The incidence of grade≥3 reactive capillary proliferation of the skin was 1.0% (7/762) and 0, respectively, with statistically significant differences (both P<0.05). No statistically significant differences were observed in other adverse reactions (all P>0.05). Conclusions: The efficacy of domestically produced immune checkpoint inhibitors is comparable to that of pembrolizumab in the treatment of driver gene-negative advanced non-small cell lung cancer. There is little difference in safety, except for the specific difference in domestically produced immune checkpoint inhibitor, which has a unique risk of reactive cutaneous capillary endothelial proliferation.